Should Democrats Rethink Their Approach to Religious Voters

url


The reason religious people made the right decision.
 
Interesting read. I'm generally on board with his conclusions, but I think he's a little cavalier about what it would take to get there.

I want the Democratic party to be as small-d democratic as is practicable. I also tend to want it to be more left-of-center on big-picture stuff, and these two desires are sometimes in tension. Having vicariously observed the Heath Mello bloodletting (to use one of the author's examples) and similar scraps, I think it's a hell of a needle to thread, though I'd like to see a better attempt to do so. IMO the D party has to fight and win statehouses and governorships nationwide, and part of the price of that is forgoing some purity tests and allowing for some flexibility. It's easy to say that, though, and still draw a line around your own sacred cows.
 
Jaw said:
I credit the nature of pop culture with strengthening my faith tremendously. I was raised in the church but had moved away from it, still God loving and God fearing, but not actively living my beliefs. A "casual Christian" some call it. Our country's constant march against Christianity caused me to reevaluate a lot of things. I was weighed and found wanting. That isn't a good feeling, but it's led to a positive change that has made my life far more enjoyable than ever before.
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing your personal experience, but I've always found this kind of language rather odd and apocalyptic. Granted, I have spent the last 15 years in a bit of a regional bubble of religious conservatism, but I struggle to understand this zero-sum viewpoint sometimes.
 
We have posters that refer to a (D) US Senator by a racial slur. Much like his President
Why should (D) waste time courting that mindset ?
Better use of resources is advancing an agenda that helps all people and getting out the vote to support those issues.

A noticable trait of the "religious voter" bloc. They seem to think it is all about them.
 
sturg33 said:
I think the government has no business in religion... but you gotta be kidding me with this. It's the left who have established the "agree with us or you're a racist/homophobic/transphobe/child molestor/tomorrow's insult of the month
Click to expand...

The left is unable to realize how radical the have been come and how many people they've pushed away. All for the sake of their moral superiority complex.
 
What people fail to realize like the Christians Catholics here, they talk some tall order of schit about the Orangutan in a clown suit on a daily basis and none of them voted for Trump NOR for Hillary, they even tailored the messages to persuade people to go 3rd party route. They are pissed because they are no choices any more. They are like Bedel said, they liked former Pres. Obama because he was more Christian than Trump by a LONG shot because the way he was brought up and Michelle wasn't going to play that anti-church crap either.

Trump doesn't give two schits about Christians or the church, all he cares about is giving them a carrot to suck on so they quit barking at him. Dems who are anti-Christian will try to trumpet support by saying "That Christian there and there and there voted for Trump because they are Christians". I would turn them and give a WTF sign and then say,"then who would you like for me to vote for? When they say Hillary, I would laugh (even though I did but I ain't crying over spillt milk) because bozo the clown is no president, but at least she would a palatable....barely.

The Dems are thinking they had a choice but sending someone of ill repute and a history is not going to sway, Christians or not, but it seems to me we are heading down to a Religious war with government intervention.

Not good at all for us.
 
thethe said:
I always find it amusing when leftists say at some point the next generation will make religion more of a minority but ignore birth rates between the two demographics. Religion is going no where and as the popular culture moves to a more godless society there will be even more who seek truth in a world of lies.
Click to expand...

Why am I so sure my thoughts are right? Your train of thought is barely winning elections now. Numbers don't lie and they don't look good for Trumps 2020 chances on a national level. He will lose provided he is not impeached or doesn'tblow us all up first.
 
VirginiaBrave said:
Why am I so sure my thoughts are right? Your train of thought is barely winning elections now. Numbers don't lie and they don't look good for Trumps 2020 chances on a national level. He will lose provided he is not impeached or doesn'tblow us all up first.
Click to expand...

What numbers? I swear this is like deja voo.
 
Couple of things worth noting as part of this conversation, B. This is kind of my abbreviated spitball take, and I'm curious to know what you think.

One is that there's a distinct lack of trust and good faith (so to speak) flowing in both directions. I think that the dilemma with D outreach to so-called faith voters (for lack of a better term...I realize that it's fuzzy) is that a lot of people probably doubt that they are reachable, so in today's data-driven campaigns, any effort targeted at them = money set on fire. That doubt stems from the lack of trust I referenced. Those voters don't trust Democrats, for reasons of culture + faith. The Ds don't trust that 1) blunting a few sharp edges will positively win votes and 2) a big chunk of those voters vote for cultural/political reasons but pin that vote on religious faith, or that they are so invested in 1-2 faith-related issues that they are not reachable. I'm not saying that any of those assumptions are necessarily true, but they seem to be pretty firmly entrenched.

The second one is to underscore that we're talking about white people here, and it's interesting to note how the conversation proceeds under a series of assumptions tangential to that.

Hell, 2016 HRC may not have devoted the same resources to outreach that BHO did, but they did have Tim Kaine working that beat pretty hard.
 
thethe said:
The left is unable to realize how radical the have been come and how many people they've pushed away. All for the sake of their moral superiority complex.
Click to expand...

I truly wonder how many people on "the left" you know (both with respect to my definition, that is distinct from the D party, and your overly-broad working boogeyman definition). A "moral superiority complex" does not accurately characterize most of the people with leftist impulses or sympathies I know; they are, conversely, often working with what they see as a moral imperative to give voice to the marginalized and help to the abject in society, and generally moreover view material and/or monetary gain (as a governing telos in life) with great suspicion. Both, coincidentally, seem very New Testament to me—which is why this failure of outreach is painfully ironic.
 
jpx7 said:
I truly wonder how many people on "the left" you know (both with respect to my definition, that is distinct from the D party, and your overly-broad working boogeyman definition). A "moral superiority complex" does not accurately characterize most of the people with leftist impulses or sympathies I know; they are, conversely, often working with what they see as a moral imperative to give voice to the marginalized and help to the abject in society, and generally moreover view material and/or monetary gain (as a governing telos in life) with great suspicion. Both, coincidentally, seem very New Testament to me—which is why this failure of outreach is painfully ironic.
Click to expand...

I live in new york. I assure you I work with and am friends with many liberals. I've had to learn to curb my beliefs because they get triggered too quickly and I don't want to lose people I care about.

Unfortunately that giving of a voice is the extent of what I've seen and is just ancinduit for some ton make themselves feel better.

I don't doubt your intentions are pure and that you genuinely care about the plight of minorities. I just believe there are different and better ways to help them.
 
Personally I am socially anti-government. I don’t want religious people trying to impose their views but I also don’t like the fact that the left is getting more aggressive about pushing its social views. I’d prefer the government avoid taking sides and to try to err on the side of allowing individual freedoms.

Sometimes that would be good elf or religious conservatives and sometimes not. I just don’t want to be told what to do by them or the social justice warriors.
 
Coredor said:
Personally I am socially anti-government. I don’t want religious people trying to impose their views but I also don’t like the fact that the left is getting more aggressive about pushing its social views. I’d prefer the government avoid taking sides and to try to err on the side of allowing individual freedoms.

Sometimes that would be good elf or religious conservatives and sometimes not. I just don’t want to be told what to do by them or the social justice warriors.
Click to expand...

I wish I could fill the screen with thanks on that Coredor, probably the best post in this whole thread. I agree with you 120%.
 
Julio3000 said:
Couple of things worth noting as part of this conversation, B. This is kind of my abbreviated spitball take, and I'm curious to know what you think.

One is that there's a distinct lack of trust and good faith (so to speak) flowing in both directions. I think that the dilemma with D outreach to so-called faith voters (for lack of a better term...I realize that it's fuzzy) is that a lot of people probably doubt that they are reachable, so in today's data-driven campaigns, any effort targeted at them = money set on fire. That doubt stems from the lack of trust I referenced. Those voters don't trust Democrats, for reasons of culture + faith. The Ds don't trust that 1) blunting a few sharp edges will positively win votes and 2) a big chunk of those voters vote for cultural/political reasons but pin that vote on religious faith, or that they are so invested in 1-2 faith-related issues that they are not reachable. I'm not saying that any of those assumptions are necessarily true, but they seem to be pretty firmly entrenched.

The second one is to underscore that we're talking about white people here, and it's interesting to note how the conversation proceeds under a series of assumptions tangential to that.

Hell, 2016 HRC may not have devoted the same resources to outreach that BHO did, but they did have Tim Kaine working that beat pretty hard.
Click to expand...

I think you are definitely right on the lack of trust. I'd also add there are high levels frankly, of disgust and disdain. It really is a bad place we are in. And for which, humanly speaking, I don't have much hope.

Also, the religious voters, which by the way I'm not certain we can just say are white Evangelicals of a certain stripe - I suspect there are many blue-collar RCs and some minorities in the mix too, will be suspicious of Democrat softening and see it as merely pandering. These 2-3 issues are now too core to the Dem identity, I see no way really of going back, no matter how I wish it weren't so.

Tim Kaine is a non-entity when it comes to reaching religious voters nationally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top